Gibbons v. Ogden
E7029
Gibbons v. Ogden was an 1824 U.S. Supreme Court case that broadly affirmed federal power over interstate commerce, significantly strengthening national authority relative to the states.
All labels observed (4)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Gibbons v. Ogden canonical | 14 |
| New York–New Jersey steamboat monopoly | 1 |
| The Steamboat Case | 1 |
| Thomas Gibbons v. Aaron Ogden | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T33056 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Gibbons v. Ogden Context triple: [Supremacy Clause, interpretedInCase, Gibbons v. Ogden]
-
A.
McCulloch v. Maryland
McCulloch v. Maryland is an 1819 U.S. Supreme Court case that affirmed federal supremacy over the states and upheld the implied powers of Congress under the Constitution.
-
B.
Marbury v. Madison
Marbury v. Madison is the landmark 1803 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the principle of judicial review, empowering federal courts to strike down laws that violate the Constitution.
-
C.
Reynolds v. United States
Reynolds v. United States is an 1879 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the distinction between protected religious belief and regulable religiously motivated conduct, holding that the Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws such as those banning polygamy.
-
D.
Wickard v. Filburn
Wickard v. Filburn is a landmark 1942 U.S. Supreme Court case that dramatically expanded federal regulatory power by holding that even purely local, non-commercial activity could be regulated under the Commerce Clause if it had a substantial effect on interstate commerce.
-
E.
Roe v. Wade
Roe v. Wade was a landmark 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that recognized a constitutional right to abortion, profoundly shaping American law and politics until it was overturned in 2022.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Gibbons v. Ogden Target entity description: Gibbons v. Ogden was an 1824 U.S. Supreme Court case that broadly affirmed federal power over interstate commerce, significantly strengthening national authority relative to the states.
-
A.
McCulloch v. Maryland
McCulloch v. Maryland is an 1819 U.S. Supreme Court case that affirmed federal supremacy over the states and upheld the implied powers of Congress under the Constitution.
-
B.
Marbury v. Madison
Marbury v. Madison is the landmark 1803 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the principle of judicial review, empowering federal courts to strike down laws that violate the Constitution.
-
C.
Chiafalo v. Washington
Chiafalo v. Washington is a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case that unanimously upheld states’ authority to penalize or replace “faithless electors” who do not vote in line with their state’s popular vote in presidential elections.
-
D.
Reynolds v. United States
Reynolds v. United States is an 1879 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the distinction between protected religious belief and regulable religiously motivated conduct, holding that the Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws such as those banning polygamy.
-
E.
Wickard v. Filburn
Wickard v. Filburn is a landmark 1942 U.S. Supreme Court case that dramatically expanded federal regulatory power by holding that even purely local, non-commercial activity could be regulated under the Commerce Clause if it had a substantial effect on interstate commerce.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (47)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
constitutional law case ⓘ landmark Supreme Court case ⓘ |
| alsoKnownAs |
Gibbons v. Ogden
ⓘ
surface form:
The Steamboat Case
|
| areaOfLaw |
commerce regulation
ⓘ
constitutional law ⓘ federalism ⓘ |
| chiefJusticeAtTime | John Marshall ⓘ |
| citation | 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 1 (1824) ⓘ |
| clarified | that commerce includes navigation ⓘ |
| concurrenceBy | William Johnson ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionCited |
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution
ⓘ
surface form:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution
|
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted | Commerce Clause ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| decisionDate | 1824-03-02 ⓘ |
| decisionType | unanimous decision ⓘ |
| defendant | Aaron Ogden ⓘ |
| fullCaseName |
Gibbons v. Ogden
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Thomas Gibbons v. Aaron Ogden
|
| hasJurisdiction | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| holding |
A New York monopoly on steamboat operation conflicted with federal law and was therefore invalid.
ⓘ
States may not enact legislation that interferes with or contradicts federal regulation of interstate commerce. ⓘ The power to regulate interstate commerce is granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. ⓘ |
| impact |
became a foundational precedent for later Commerce Clause cases
ⓘ
reduced the ability of individual states to impose barriers to interstate trade ⓘ significantly expanded the scope of congressional power under the Commerce Clause ⓘ |
| involved |
navigation between New York and New Jersey
ⓘ
steamboat navigation rights ⓘ |
| languageOfDecision | English ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
conflict between federal and state regulation
ⓘ
federal power over interstate commerce ⓘ scope of the Commerce Clause ⓘ |
| limited | state power to regulate interstate commerce ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | John Marshall ⓘ |
| originatedIn |
U.S. state of New York
ⓘ
surface form:
State of New York
|
| pageInUnitedStatesReports | 1 ⓘ |
| plaintiff | Thomas Gibbons ⓘ |
| precedentFor |
Gonzales v. Raich
ⓘ
Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States ⓘ Wickard v. Filburn ⓘ |
| reinforced | national economic integration over state economic protectionism ⓘ |
| relatedDoctrine |
broad interpretation of the Commerce Clause
ⓘ
supremacy of federal law over conflicting state law ⓘ |
| strengthened | federal authority over interstate commerce ⓘ |
| subjectMatter | navigation as a form of commerce ⓘ |
| volumeOfUnitedStatesReports | 22 ⓘ |
| vote | 6–0 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1824 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Gibbons v. Ogden Description of subject: Gibbons v. Ogden was an 1824 U.S. Supreme Court case that broadly affirmed federal power over interstate commerce, significantly strengthening national authority relative to the states.
Referenced by (17)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
this entity surface form:
Thomas Gibbons v. Aaron Ogden
this entity surface form:
The Steamboat Case
this entity surface form:
New York–New Jersey steamboat monopoly